Robert Reich: Clinton Can't Achieve Magnitude of Change Needed; Sanders Can

JB: Ultimately, how realistic is it for outsiders to challenge the system? Trump is a special case because of his unlimited funds so he has no need for Super PACS or establishment acceptance. But how about Bernie? He's an Independent, not even a Democrat and all the powers that be, in and out of the party, keep talking about his unelectability. Your thoughts?

RR: The only people capable of challenging the system are outsiders who (1) raise lots of money from small donors, (2) mobilize a small army of citizens who will continue to push for major reforms even if (especially if) their candidate succeeds but even if he or she doesn't, and (3) use the campaign to help educate the public on what's really happening. In all these respects, Bernie Sanders is doing what's necessary.

JB: You're quite familiar with both of the Democratic candidates. You've known Hillary for decades, her husband even longer, and served in President Clinton's cabinet. But you're also a progressive and Hillary, despite her protestations, mostly is not. Can you compare and contrast Bernie and Hillary, both in style and substance? I think your unique perspective will be helpful to our readers.

RR: I've known Hillary Clinton since she was a freshman at Wellesley, and have always admired her. Of all the candidates now seeking the presidency she's most ready to assume the role and do it exceedingly well. She's extraordinarily smart and disciplined, works fiercely hard, has been a senator and a secretary of state, and has virtually apprenticed for the job -- as a First Lady more directly involved in policy than any other First Lady in history, save perhaps Eleanor Roosevelt. And I think she could accomplish some important incremental changes.

But I don't think she can achieve the magnitude of change that's needed because she isn't leading a movement to reclaim our economy and democracy from the moneyed interests, as is Bernie Sanders..I've worked with Bernie for over twenty years, and know him as someone deeply committed to social justice. Yet his campaign really isn't about him, per se. If Elizabeth Warren had run instead of Bernie, she'd be heading up the same movement. The movement was already there, building steam. ( think Bernie would be the first to admit this.)

JB: I'm curious whether Warren would have had an easier time if she had been running. Maybe it doesn't really matter. Readers may simply be afraid to reach for, and ultimately vote for, big change, Robert. The echo chamber is awash with attacks and so many, many discouraging words. What would you say to those readers?

RR: Incrementalism no longer works. Income, wealth, and political power continue to concentrate at the top -- and reinforce each other. This can't be reversed unless a large number of Americans demand it to be -- which requires bold ideas, a strong political movement, and tenacity. The practical choice isn't small adjustments versus big change. Big changes will come. The question is whether they come through the democratic process or through authoritarian populism mobilized by someone like Donald Trump. The democratic (small "d") version seems to me to be far safer.

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).